the aim of this study is To evaluate and compare the clinical performance of Self- Cure Bulk fill Composite Resin Versus Conventional Bulk fill resin composite in Restoration of Proximal Lesions over a Period of 24 months Follow-up.
Examination and selection of all patients will be done according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. A class II cavity will be prepared after local anesthesia has been given as required. Sectional matricing and wedging will be done.Followed by, placement of restorative material according to the randomization sequence. For the intervention: The sectional matrix will be applied first, followed by filling of cavity with Self-Cure bulk-fill Resin Composite. (Stela Automix or Stela Capsule, SDI Ltd, Australia) For the control group: The sectional matrix will be applied first, followed by filling of the cavity with the bulk-fill resin composite material (Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill, Liechtenstein). Clinical evaluation will be done using USPHS criteria at 6,12,18 and 24 monthes follow up
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE
Enrollment
56
A class II cavity will be prepared after local anesthesia has been given as requierd . Rubber dam isolation will be done. Sectional matricing and wedging will be done. Followed by placement of restorative material according to the randomization sequence.
Cairo University
Cairo, Egypt
Marginal adaptation
The restoration will be clinically assessed using USPHS criteria. Restoration will be given Alpha for the ideal clinical situation, Bravo for acceptable and charlie for clinically unacceptable and in need of replacement.
Time frame: 24 months
Marginal discoloration
The restoration will be clinically assessed using USPHS criteria. Restoration will be given Alpha for the ideal clinical situation, Bravo for acceptable and charlie for clinically unacceptable and in need of replacement.
Time frame: 24 months
Recurrent caries
The restoration will be clinically assessed using USPHS criteria. Restoration will be given Alpha for the ideal clinical situation and charlie for clinically unacceptable and in need of replacement.
Time frame: 24 months
Retention analysis
The restoration will be clinically assessed using USPHS criteria. Restoration will be given Alpha for the ideal clinical situation and charlie for clinically unacceptable and in need of replacement.
Time frame: 24 months
Surface roughness
The restoration will be clinically assessed using USPHS criteria. Restoration will be given Alpha for the ideal clinical situation, Bravo for acceptable and charlie for clinically unacceptable and in need of replacement.
Time frame: 24 months
Postoperative sensitivity
The restoration will be clinically assessed using USPHS criteria. Restoration will be given Alpha for the ideal clinical situation and charlie for clinically unacceptable and in need of replacement.
Time frame: 24 months
Anatomic form
The restoration will be clinically assessed using USPHS criteria. Restoration will be given Alpha for the ideal clinical situation, Bravo for acceptable and charlie for clinically unacceptable and in need of replacement.
Time frame: 24 months
Proximal contact
The restoration will be clinically assessed using USPHS criteria. Restoration will be given Alpha for the ideal clinical situation, Bravo for acceptable and charlie for clinically unacceptable and in need of replacement.
Time frame: 24 months
Color match
The restoration will be clinically assessed using USPHS criteria. Restoration will be given Alpha for the ideal clinical situation, Bravo for acceptable and charlie for clinically unacceptable and in need of replacement.
Time frame: 24 months
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.